Bacon vs Rückenspeck vom freilaufenden Eichelschwein
Overall, Bacon has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 1.
Bacon
Rückenspeck vom freilaufenden Eichelschwein
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Bacon | Rückenspeck vom freilaufende... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 3 | 3 |
| Calories | 301 kcal | 818 kcal |
| Fat | 25 g | 90 g |
| Saturated fat | 10 g | 35 g |
| Sugars | 0 g | 1 g |
| Salt | 2.2 g | 1.5 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | — |
| Protein | 19 g | 1 g |
| Additives | 2 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Bacon has 63% fewer calories (301 kcal vs 818 kcal).
- Bacon has 72% less fat (25 g vs 90 g).
- Bacon has 71% less saturated fat (10 g vs 35 g).
- Bacon has no sugar, while Rückenspeck vom freilaufenden Eichelschwein has 1 g.
- Rückenspeck vom freilaufenden Eichelschwein has 32% less salt (1.5 g vs 2.2 g).
- Bacon has 95% more protein (19 g vs 1 g).
Ingredients
Bacon
Schweinefleisch*, Speisesalz, Antioxidationsmittel: Natriumascorbat; Konservierungsstoff: Natriumnitrit; Reifungskulturen, Buchenholzrauch. *QS-Ware. Kann Spuren von Senf und Sellerie enthalten.
Rückenspeck vom freilaufenden Eichelschwein
Schweinerückenspeck, Speisesalz, Buchenholzrauch
FAQ
Which is healthier: Bacon or Rückenspeck vom freilaufenden Eichelschwein?
Overall, Bacon has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. We compare Nutri-Score, processing level and seven nutrients per 100 g. Your own needs (for example low sugar or high protein) may make a different choice better for you.
Which has fewer calories?
Bacon has fewer calories: 301 kcal versus 818 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Bacon has less sugar: 0 g versus 1 g per 100 g.